Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[bjlong]

Aqizzar, do you have any general guidelines on making these units? I'd imagine that some stats would be more closely linked than others--for example, # and W or A and T. I'd like to try coming up with a few sample units.

Also... leaders. Do they simply add flat stats and the leadership dice roll? Or could they also add more things--for example, a leader could have the ability to comandeer nearby units with a low logic score.

Along those lines, would there be special effects that units could use--guerilla tactics could allow one to "jump" from one place to another in the enemy's perception--or would you prefer to keep things more stat and tactic based?

[Aqizzar]

Answering in reverse order-

Stat and tactic based.  I just had an idea that some units might have a special ability for the player to redeploy them after the initial placement, in response to the enemy's deployment.  But other than that, units will have to hoof it everywhere, barring some kind of transport or a special teleport rule.

The basic leadership "package" would be a higher die roll that only effects his own unit.  Basically, increasing the die-size would be cheaper than increasing the base state, because of the variability versus guarantee.  Like the teleport thing, I have a whole slew of unit and model "special rules" in mind, that could do thinks like letting other units use a model's Logic.  I'm saving that kind of crunchy stuff for later, after I have the fundamental system hammered down.

There will be hard guidelines on stat designs.  For instance, Size, Strength, and Toughness are all closely related - it's hard to imagine a creature twice the size of a man not being significantly stronger and tougher.  Larger Sizes would demand a minimum in some stats, and probably cap a maximum on Agility.  Likewise, Strength and Toughness being functions of mass, they couldn't be too far apart from each other, probably required to differ by no more than 50% going either way.

I don't have anything more detailed to say on model creation, especially with the weapon and armor system still up in the air.  But feel free to brainstorm all the unit designs you like.  Heck, I encourage you post them.  The more ideas I get for things to make, the better I'll know how to shape the system.

[bjlong]

Alright! I'll spend some time today trying to come up with some units. I'll have two sets: ones that I'll try to make "balanced," and one that I'll try to use to break the game in interesting ways, as a way of pressure testing.

For reference, what's the cost of your basic unit?

E: Actually, I think a simple system would just add the stats together. Not sure how to do dice rolls, yet, but I think I can come up with something.

[Org]

Alright! I'll spend some time today trying to come up with some units. I'll have two sets: ones that I'll try to make "balanced," and one that I'll try to use to break the game in interesting ways, as a way of pressure testing.

For reference, what's the cost of your basic unit?

E: Actually, I think a simple system would just add the stats together. Not sure how to do dice rolls, yet, but I think I can come up with something.

Not sure if that would work. It might. But what about special rules?

[bjlong]

It's a quick workaround. I might write up a formula to weight it towards certain things--#, the average of F and R, for instance. From there, it'd just be a matter of normalizing it to whatever values Aqizzar feels appropriate.

I should mention I'm coming up with max and min value formulae while doing this. If my values seem good, then I'll get the formulae up.

[Org]

Hm. And then you have to add in weapon costs.

So it is a little difficult.

[Org]

AND it wont work too well. Mainly because while it seems small, upgrading, lets say, Bravery from 5 to 6 makes a large difference. Instead of failing a charge 50% of the time, its 33%.

[Org]

What does Aqizzar think about it?

And what about Force Organization? How should it be so that players arent having lots of Special Units?

[Aqizzar]

I'll figure out force organization later, after I figure out units, after I figure out models, after I figure out weapons.

But yes, Bravery especially will cause massive changes when altered up or down by even one point.  I might change that, to allow for greater variation or possibility, I don't see any good reason to.  It's this rather harsh system, or a lack of chance and penalty at all.

Also, you know there's an EDIT button right?  Don't think the timeframe means you can't use it.

[Org]

Yes. I know.

EDIT: I do like how shooting at a Specific Model(i.e A Sergeant, I guess) is 11.

And lets say I have a Leader(and by this I mean my General) with a bunch of Gunners. he has a large Bravery, would he give it to his unit?

[Rysith]

Yes. I know.

EDIT: I do like how shooting at a Specific Model(i.e A Sergeant, I guess) is 11.

And lets say I have a Leader(and by this I mean my General) with a bunch of Gunners. he has a large Bravery, would he give it to his unit?

I'd vote for bravery to be averaged over the unit, so that mixing in some well-trained units could give more flexibility to squads of otherwise-cowardly soldiers. A General or other leadership-special unit (standard bearer, maybe?) might also give a bravery bonus to their unit.

[Org]

Yes. I know.

EDIT: I do like how shooting at a Specific Model(i.e A Sergeant, I guess) is 11.

And lets say I have a Leader(and by this I mean my General) with a bunch of Gunners. he has a large Bravery, would he give it to his unit?

I'd vote for bravery to be averaged over the unit, so that mixing in some well-trained units could give more flexibility to squads of otherwise-cowardly soldiers. A General or other leadership-special unit (standard bearer, maybe?) might also give a bravery bonus to their unit.

I think we should have Heroes, which envelop guys we make like Captains, or Overseers, Wizards, etc etc. I am not sure about averaging Bravery.

And on another matter:What are we doing for Vehicles and Joining Units?

[bjlong]

Alright! Hammered out a few examples, here are the stats and some descriptions.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Base: What Aquizzar posted. Here for completeness.

#-2 M-3 F-5 R-5 Z-5 W-1 S-5 A-5 T-5 I-5 B-5 L-5

Bigguy: Stereotypical "Big guy" build:

#-2 M-3 F-8 R-2 Z-7 W-1 S-7 A-3 T-7 I-3 B-5 L-3

Skinnyguy: Stereotypical "Skinny guy" build:

#-2 M-3 F-3 R-8 Z-3 W-1 S-2 A-10 T-2 I-7 B-3 L-7

Sniper: Stereotypical gun 'em from far, far away build.

#-2 M-3 F-1 R-10 Z-5 W-1 S-3 A-7 T-4 I-3 B-2 L-10

Brawler: Stereotypical rush in and smash someone build

#-2 M-3 F-10 R-1 Z-7 W-1 S-7 A-4 T-4 I-2 B-8   L-2

Linesman: Stereotypical stand there and don't die build

#-2 M-2 F-6 R-6 Z-6 W-1 S-7 A-7 T-8 I-2 B-1 L-3

Scout: Stereotypical run real fast build

#-2 M-5 F-2 R-8 Z-4 W-1 S-3 A-10 T-2 I-8 B-1 L-5

Rambo: An attempt at a hero or leader character's base stats. Focus was on attacking. Note that the above builds sum to 51 in stats; Rambo sums to 55, as he's goddamn Rambo.

#-2 M-3 F-7 R-7 Z-5 W-2 S-4 A-3 T-3 I-7 B-8 L-4

I'm not too confident with these results. The only heartening thing is that I had trouble fitting within my goals and the limiting equations that I had. I'll post the equations if requested, but there are some... inconsitencies, let's say? Definitely not as well thought out as I'd like.

Also! I tried to keep most of these normalized on a 10 pt. scale, with 10 or so as the limit of human ability. Z, M, #, and W were notable exceptions.

[Org]

I would have to say Ranged 10 is too cheap.

As in, probably always hits.

[Vactor]

It might be helpful to make it costlier to upgrade from 9 to 10 than it is from 5 to 6. ie a stat of 3 costs 1 point, while a stat of 10 costs 20 points.  (just arbitrary numbers i threw out, you would want to figure out to what scale this is applied)